Neurophysiological basis of respiratory discomfort improvement by mandibular advancement in awake OSA patients.

Patients with obstructive sleep apneas (OSA) do not complain from dyspnea during resting breathing. Placement of a mandibular advancement device (MAD) can lead to a sense of improved respiratory comfort ("pseudo-relief") ascribed to a habituation phenomenon. To substantiate this conjecture, we hypothesized that, in non-dyspneic awake OSA patients, respiratory-related electroencephalographic figures, abnormally present during awake resting breathing, would disappear or change in parallel with MAD-associated pseudo-relief. In 20 patients, we compared natural breathing and breathing with MAD on: breathing discomfort (transitional visual analog scale, VAS-2); upper airway mechanics, assessed in terms of pressure peak/time to peak (TTP) ratio respiratory-related electroencephalography (EEG) signatures, including slow event-related preinspiratory potentials; and a between-state discrimination based on continuous connectivity evaluation. MAD improved breathing and upper airway mechanics. The 8 patients in whom the EEG between-state discrimination was considered effective exhibited higher Peak/TTP improvement and transitional VAS ratings while wearing MAD than the 12 patients where it was not. These results support the notion of habituation to abnormal respiratory-related afferents in OSA patients and fuel the causative nature of the relationship between dyspnea, respiratory-related motor cortical activity and impaired upper airway mechanics in this setting.

Osteopathic Manipulation of the Sphenopalatine Ganglia Versus Sham Manipulation, in Obstructive Sleep Apnoea Syndrom: A Randomised Controlled Trial.

(1) Background: osteopathic manipulation of the sphenopalatine ganglia (SPG) blocks the action of postganglionic sensory fibres. This neuromodulation can reduce nasal obstruction and enhance upper airway stability. We investigated the manipulation of the SPG in 31 patients with obstructive sleep apnoea syndrome (OSAS); (2) Methods: Randomised, controlled, double-blind, crossover study. Participants received active (AM), then sham manipulation (SM), or vice versa. The primary endpoint was apnoea-hypopnoea index (AHI). Secondary endpoints were variation of nasal obstruction evaluated by peak nasal inspiratory flow (PNIF) and upper airways stability evaluated by awake critical closing pressure [awake Pcrit]), at 30 min and 24 h. Schirmer's test and pain were assessed immediately post-manipulation. Tactile/gustatory/olfactory/auditory/nociceptive/visual sensations were recorded. Adverse events were collected throughout. (3) Results: SPG manipulation did not reduce AHI (p = 0.670). PNIF increased post-AM but not post-SM at 30 min (AM-SM: 18 [10; 38] L/min, p = 0.0001) and 24 h (23 [10; 30] L/min, p = 0.001). There was no significant difference on awake Pcrit (AM-SM) at 30 min or 24 h). Sensations were more commonly reported post-AM (100% of patients) than post-SM (37%). Few adverse events and no serious adverse events were reported. (4) Conclusions: SPG manipulation is not supported as a treatment for OSAS but reduced nasal obstruction. This effect remains to be confirmed in a larger sample before using this approach to reduce nasal congestion in CPAP-treated patients or in mild OSAS.

Mandibular advancement reveals long-term suppression of breathing discomfort in patients with obstructive sleep apnea syndrome.

Obstructive sleep apnoea syndrome (OSAS) patients do not report breathing discomfort in spite of abnormal upper airway mechanics. We studied respiratory sensations in OSAS patients without and with mandibular advancement device (MAD). Fifty-seven moderate to severe non obese OSAS patients were asked about breathing discomfort using visual analogue scales (VAS) in the sitting position (VAS-1), after lying down (VAS-2), then with MAD (VAS-3). Awake critical closing pressure (awake Pcrit) was measured in 15 patients without then with MAD. None of the patients reported breathing discomfort when sitting but 19 patients (33%) did when lying (VAS-2: -20% or less). A feeling of "easier breathing" with MAD was observed and was more marked in patients reporting breathing discomfort when supine (VAS-3: +66.0% [49.0; 89.0]) than in those not doing so (VAS-3: +28.5% [1.0; 56.5], p = 0.007). MAD-induced change in awake Pcrit was correlated to VAS-3. In conclusion, MAD revealed "latent dyspnea" related to the severity of upper airways mechanics abnormalities in OSAS patients.

Upper airway stabilization by osteopathic manipulation of the sphenopalatine ganglion versus sham manipulation in OSAS patients: a proof-of-concept, randomized, crossover, double-blind, controlled study.

BACKGROUND: Osteopathic manipulative treatment (OMT) of the sphenopalatine ganglion (SPG) is used empirically for the treatment of rhinitis and snoring and is thought to increase pharyngeal stability. This trial was designed to study the effects of this treatment on pharyngeal stability evaluated by critical closing pressure in obstructive sleep apnoea syndrome. METHODS: This single-centre, randomized, crossover, double-blind study compared active manipulation and sham manipulation of the SPG. Randomization was computer-generated. Patients each received one active manipulation and one sham manipulation at an interval of 21 days and were evaluated 30 min and 48 h after each session administered by a qualified osteopath. Neither the patients, nor the investigator performing the evaluations were informed about the order of the two techniques (double-blind). The primary endpoint was the percentage of responding patients presenting increased pharyngeal stability defined by a variation of critical closing pressure (Pcrit) of at least -4 cmH2O at 30 min. Secondary endpoints were the variation of Pcrit in absolute values, sleepiness and snoring. Others endpoints were lacrimation (Schirmer's test), induced pain, sensations experienced during OMT. RESULTS: Ten patients were included and nine (57 [50; 58] years, comprising 7 men, with an apnoea-hypopnoea index of 31.0 [25.5; 33.2]/h; (values are median [quartiles])) were analysed. Seven patients were analysed for the primary endpoint and nine patients were analysed for secondary endpoints. Five patients responded after active manipulation versus no patients after sham manipulation (p = 0.0209). Active manipulation induced more intense pain (p = 0.0089), increased lacrimation (ns) and more tactile, nociceptive and gustatory sensations (13 versus 1) compared to sham manipulation. No significant difference was observed for the other endpoints. CONCLUSIONS: Osteopathic manipulative treatment of the SPG may improve pharyngeal stability in obstructive sleep apnoea syndrome. This trial validates the feasibility of the randomized, controlled, double-blind methodology for evaluation of this osteopathic treatment. Studies on a larger sample size must specify the efficacy on the apnoea-hypopnoea index. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The study was retrospectively registered in the clinicaltrial.gov registry under reference NCT01193738 on 1st September 2010 (first inclusion May 19, 2010).